posted at 7:21 pm on April 24, 2012 by Allahpundit

Ed’s right, of course, that tonight is an anticlimax but there are still two good reasons to turn on cable news at 8 p.m. One is the Romney coronation. Excerpts from his prepared remarks:

Four years ago Barack Obama dazzled us in front of Greek columns with sweeping promises of hope and change. But after we came down to earth, after the celebration and parades, what do we have to show for three and a half years of President Obama?

Is it easier to make ends meet? Is it easier to sell your home or buy a new one? Have you saved what you needed for retirement? Are you making more in your job? Do you have a better chance to get a better job? Do you pay less at the pump?

If the answer were “yes” to those questions, then President Obama would be running for re-election based on his achievements…and rightly so. But because he has failed, he will run a campaign of diversions, distractions, and distortions. That kind of campaign may have worked at another place and in a different time. But not here and not now. It’s still about the economy …and we’re not stupid.

Two is the fittingly surreal saga of whether Newt will signal an end to his campaign. Last night he told NBC, “I think we need to take a deep look at what we are doing,” and hinted that he might be done if he loses badly in Delaware, where he’s been campaigning lately. A source elaborated on that for NRO this morning, insisting that he’d have to finish at least a close second to Romney there to keep going. Then came the tamp-down from “campaign insiders,” who told Byron York that Newt won’t quit tonight no matter what happens.

Team Gingrich sees three possible scenarios. The first scenario is that Gingrich wins Delaware. “That’s a signal to conservatives and Tea Partiers and grassroots activists that there still is a conservative they can send to Tampa,” says the Gingrich aide. “And it sends the message to Romney that it’s not time to turn to the general election.” No one knows whether the winning scenario is at all plausible; there has been no polling of Delaware, with its tiny Republican population and 17 delegates.

Next comes the middle-road scenario in which Gingrich narrowly loses Delaware. “That’s where we do well enough that it demonstrates there’s a chink in Romney’s armor,” the aide says. When asked what “well enough” means, the aide answered, “Within a couple of points — a close loss.”

The worst-case scenario is that Gingrich loses big in Delaware.

If they lose, says the source, they’ll “reassess” things but Gingrich will continue on to North Carolina to try to pick up another southern state. I really hope he pulls it off tonight in Delaware, just because I’m itching to watch a victory speech from bizarroland in which Newt boldly proclaims “game on” in the primary while literally everyone else in the GOP is pivoting to Obama. It’ll be an instant classic. A little taste from his chat with reporters this afternoon: “I think it’s a very substantial mistake for Governor Romney to be pretending these primaries aren’t occurring, and for him to be having ‘a general-election speech’ tonight in New Hampshire. He’s the front-runner, but he’s not the nominee, and I think it’s a little insulting to the people of these states.” C’mon, Dover tea partiers: If you made it to the polls for Christine O’Donnell, you can make it there to guarantee one last Gingrichian stemwinder. And even if not, I think Newt will probably find enough encouragement in PPP’s poll showing him within 10 of Romney in Texas to plow ahead anyway. My hunch is that he wants one more big win, one more right hook to Romney’s jaw, before succumbing.

Here’s his new video message aimed squarely at Santorum voters in North Carolina. Speaking of which, how much longer until Team Sweater Vest climbs aboard Romney’s “Anybody But Obama” Express? According to CNN, a meeting’s likely to happen early next month to discuss the role “social conservatives, tea party activists and blue collar Republicans will play in the campaign and in the Romney administration.”

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

I think you have that backward: the right drove the meme that criticizing Bain was the same as criticizing capitalism itself. As if well-connected firms with high barriers to entry, no transparency and rampant use of government tax breaks and kickbacks amounted to anything resembling a free market.

The one last comment I want to make on this thread comes from one of the comments.

Newt Gingrich currently gets Secret Service protection. It comes out of the Bobby Kennedy death. Relevant possible candidates get security. Newt is vowing to stick with this until Tampa. Is he a relevant candidate or when does such protection stop even if the candidate vows to press on? This is uncharted territory.

Given that the new district is made up more of Altmire’s old district than CritzMurtha’s, and given how close the margin was in 2010 in the Critz-Burns (under two points) and Altmire-Rothfus (also under two) races, I’m hopeful.

steebo77 on April 24, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Me too. Good work by the unions (the turnout in Cambria County was amazing), but fortunately for us Critz is the weaker democrat here, especially when he’ll have Obama at the top of the ticket dragging him down.

Plus, Rothefus being from Edgeworth will have the geography working for him.

I think you can do work online for them…as for cali, awful mindset indeed (lib :(, superb place/nature-wise and wonderful climate…can’t beat that, wouldn’t change it for anything in the world, well, maybe only for my native France, but we vacation there all the time :)…

He can self-finance to a larger extent than Welch and the later was a bit of a disappointment – didn’t show much in terms of campaign skills.

Casey will be almost impossible to beat, but the place to start is with a candidate with enough money to mount a strong airwaves campaign – and that doesn’t suck money off more winnable races.

joana on April 24, 2012 at 11:02 PM

He just wrapped up his victory speech on PCN. He actually hit all of the right points and with the right tone. I especially like that he can campaign effectively on energy issues (coal, oil, gas) and his business experience will be good.

The former-Democrat thing may very well be a non-issue. If all I’d had to go on was his sppech, I would have never guessed his origins. Hope he’s sincere.

You’re right, though. Casey will be extremely hard to knock off, but not impossible.

As if well-connected firms with high barriers to entry, no transparency and rampant use of government tax breaks and kickbacks amounted to anything resembling a free market.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:04 PM

.
OK, let the effective (in this hyper-regulated environment) be the enemy of the perfect (as though it existed, ever). At least it is not the command economy that Ø and the left want. In that sense, it is not backwards.

YOu do realize there’s a difference between the taxpayers footing a $4B bill and Romney earning millions right?

Newt needs to get out, it’s over. Plus he basically cost Santorum the nomination by splitting the conservative vote.

I’m not ROmney fan, but let’s not play class warfare games.

Plus Romney donated his inheritance money to charity. How many people would even think of doing that?? And he donated $4 million in charity last year (much more than the current occupier in the white house).

OK, let the effective (in this hyper-regulated environment) be the enemy of the perfect (as though it existed, ever).

ExpressoBold on April 24, 2012 at 11:10 PM

I have no idea what you’re talking about. Bain made its owners a lot of money; still does, to the tune of $7mil a year for Romney. It did so by screwing a lot of powerless people over. Call that “effective” if you want.

Capitalism is about providing goods and services people want at a price they are willing to pay. High finance just rips people off.

Me too. Good work by the unions (the turnout in Cambria County was amazing), but fortunately for us Critz is the weaker democrat here, especially when he’ll have Obama at the top of the ticket dragging him down.

Plus, Rothefus being from Edgeworth will have the geography working for him.

I rate this as lean R.

joana on April 24, 2012 at 11:08 PM

I just looked up the numbers for Cambria. Critz got a ridiculous 91.2% of the votes! If only the unions could be this stupid every day…

Plus he basically cost Santorum the nomination by splitting the conservative vote.

LevinFan on April 24, 2012 at 11:13 PM

Ah, now we see your beef. That’s actually false. By the time Santorum dropped out (which showed what a weakling he was, btw), Newt was only taking voters from Romney. the people who supported both candidates jumped to Santorum long ago.

By the way, Rep. Tim Holden lost the primary on the new PA-17 to some far-left liberal. Another Blue Dog goes down. *insert Obama eats dogs joke*

joana on April 24, 2012 at 11:11 PM

I was really looking forward to voting Holden out in November (despite his vote against Obamacare). Then redistricting moved Harrisburg out of the 17th and into the 11th and I lost the chance. Looks like no one will have that opportunity after all.

Ah, now we see your beef. That’s actually false. By the time Santorum dropped out (which showed what a weakling he was, btw), Newt was only taking voters from Romney. the people who supported both candidates jumped to Santorum long ago.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:15 PM

I just wanted a conservative. Santorum and Newt hurt eachother allowing Romney to win.

Santorum was a weakling? Let’s see he came out of nowhere from polling below 2% to have an amazing run, almost pulling it off. Yeah what a weakling! He was the only candidate who told voters in IOWA that he was opposed to farm subsidies while Newt and Romney pandered on it.

Santorum also never backed down from his support for the Iraq war despite how unpopular it was during his reelection year in 2006.

Again what a weakling!

BTW: Newt is very similar to Romney in alot of areas: the mandate, cap/tax, Tarp… to name a few.

I’m not happy with Romney, but we have to beat Obama period.

And thanks for editing out the beginning of my post. You were wrong to play class warfare games attacking Romney for how much money he makes. You sound like a member of the lamestream media.

My guess is he’s a free-trader. Wall Street doesn’t like tariffs, and he is for whatever they want. They’re bankrolling this shindig after all.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I wasn’t sure, there is so little actual discussion of policy positions by anyone. I think Trump falls under neomerchantilist, and I know he endorsed Romney over Newt. I was wondering if Romney had moved to a tariffs-against-China position recently.

I suppose they can serve a useful purpose, to a point, like any policy really. They might help keep wages up for a while, or help a new industry get established. Given the coming trade war with China, I was just wondering where Romney stood.

The one last comment I want to make on this thread comes from one of the comments.

Newt Gingrich currently gets Secret Service protection. It comes out of the Bobby Kennedy death. Relevant possible candidates get security. Newt is vowing to stick with this until Tampa. Is he a relevant candidate or when does such protection stop even if the candidate vows to press on? This is uncharted territory.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2012 at 11:07 PM

I blame Mitt for us having this stupid discussion on something we know nothing about.

The USSS makes this determination. I hope they do so professionally. If not we have far bigger problems. If you are finding fault with them then perhaps talk to your rep and they can investigate it.

Given that the new district is made up more of Altmire’s old district than CritzMurtha’s, and given how close the margin was in 2010 in the Critz-Burns (under two points) and Altmire-Rothfus (also under two) races, I’m hopeful.

steebo77 on April 24, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Well, I sure hope Rothfus can clear the bar by two or more points. The problem I foresee is with those old Dem lifers, people like my 88 year old mother-in-law. God bless her, but trying to talk to her about voting for someone other than a Democrat is like trying to talk to the proverbial brick wall. I know a lot of older people like her — very set in their ways and not trying to acknowledge that what they knew as the Democrat party in their younger years bears absolutely no resemblance to the party today.

He became a “conservative hero” for the same reason that many conservatives backed Romney in 2008: They didn’t like the frontrunner. I expect the general will heavily reflect this sentiment. Like in 2008.

That is just more ignorance. Romney and his people hurt both of them, deliberately and repeatedly. They were never “up” at the same time.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Real problem was neither was a great candidate. I doubt either ever entered thinking they could actually win the nomination.

But Mitt was the one that had no chance of beating Obama. Either of the others could have easily beaten Obama. Conservatives have won 5 of 5 in the last 40 years. Moderates lost 5 of 5. So losing for Newt or Rick would have been out of the norm. Winning by Mitt would take a miracle.

Sure Mitt spoke conservatively tonight but you know what I heard.

Big Government spending to enrich Rich Colleges. This student loan is all about making colleges richer not the students who get screwed with much higher tuition every single time the government give the colleges they go to more. The students just pay more and more. 25% increase during Obama alone. 25% when the rest of us lost buying power the colleges get 25% more. But Mitt the RAT wants to enrich them and do his master Obama a huge favor.

You make so little sense I can’t even figure out your argument for rebuttal. Socialism = government control of the means of production and large social safety net. Populism = working to level the (capitalist!) playing field for everybody; i.e., a government that doesn’t favor the wealthy and well-connected but instead treats everybody the same. They aren’t remotely the same thing.

Er, yes it is…the Socialist mantra has been (since before WWI) that “The evil people are the manufacturers, the bankers, the stock brokers”, etc.JEWS!

Your code word of “populism” doesn’t work any more. You’re “we’re looking out for the little guy” makes as much sense as Corzine raising money for Obama…ooops, guess that doesn’t count.

Maybe you were hoping for a less enlightened voting base, like 2008…

ccrosby on April 24, 2012 at 11:37 PM

FIFY. Sorry about that, but all socialist/marxist/fascist rhetoric is the same: the Jews are rich, the rich are evil, the Jews are evil, etc.

Populism may sometime unfortunately sound similar, but it isn’t at all the same thing. Elites exist in every society, and people, mostly middle-class, rise up against them in populist movements throughout history. Its basically what the Revolutionary period was all about, world wide. Moving out of the period of Nobles and Monarchies and merchantilist imperialism.

Yeah, it had nothing to do with his daughter being sick you disgusting ________.

You give a bad name to all conservatives!

LevinFan on April 24, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Gingrich is done and Santorum is out so I’m done trying to make nice with his people. It actually didn’t have anything to do with his daughter, he just ran out of money. Instead of soldiering on making do with the money he had, he quit. I have no patience for that.

Moving out of the period of Nobles and Monarchies and merchantilist imperialism.

Buckshot Bill on April 24, 2012 at 11:43 PM

It seems we have come full circle since those days of enlighenment doesn’t it? I miss the days when no one was above the law now if you have connections there is no law or you write your own little law.

It’s the retards who pushed ridiculous stocks on old ladies over the phone while laughing to each other how they were taking granny for a ride. It’s the jackholes who created a super-smart computer program telling them the *exact* likelihood that a subprime mortgage-backed security would be paid or defaulted, allowing them to carve up “tranches” of thousands of MBS and take exorbitant fees while stupid pension plans were left holding the bag when the whole system blew up due to massive asset value uncertainty. It’s the same folks whose college roommate was the guy in charge of the rating agency that gave a completely opaque instrument a AAA credit rating. And the same folks whose other college roommate went into politics and wrote the first two guys huge bailout checks in return for a couple of weeks’ stay at his summer house in Calais. It’s opaque, it’s deceitful, and it’s not at all capitalist. The mob is more honest than Wall Street.

Gingrich is done and Santorum is out so I’m done trying to make nice with his people. It actually didn’t have anything to do with his daughter, he just ran out of money. Instead of soldiering on making do with the money he had, he quit. I have no patience for that.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Glad to know you have the inside scoop. Santorum has been nothing but class the whole time but it’s nice that some commenter sitting on the sidelines is calling him a quitter.

It seems we have come full circle since those days of enlightenment doesn’t it? I miss the days when no one was above the law now if you have connections there is no law or you write your own little law.

unseen on April 24, 2012 at 11:47 PM

If the law doesn’t apply to all, it doesn’t really exist at all.

People don’t read enough these days, I think. Or they waste time on blogs or something. :)

People don’t read enough these days, I think. Or they waste time on blogs or something. :)

Buckshot Bill on April 24, 2012 at 11:50 PM

lol. that could be. and I agree there is no law. choas rules in this country and the world, might makes right and if you have enough money or connections you can write your own ticket. this isn’t an Obama thing. It has been going on for decades now and we are at the bitter end now I think. the experiment in freedom has never been so close to being snuffed out since 1776

You make so little sense I can’t even figure out your argument for rebuttal. Socialism = government control of the means of production and large social safety net. Populism = working to level the (capitalist!) playing field for everybody; i.e., a government that doesn’t favor the wealthy and well-connected but instead treats everybody the same. They aren’t remotely the same thing.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:41 PM

populism was also a precursor of fascism, and we all know how Nationalsozialismus ‘leveled’ the field, and by that I mean most European countries :-(…

The Senate is allowing him to do that. A GOP-controlled congress will keep Obumbles occupied with corruption investigations. I look forward to watching all the roaches scurry for the shadows. A Mitt admin will just sweep all that under the rug, and I think the nation needs to see it.

You make so little sense I can’t even figure out your argument for rebuttal. Socialism = government control of the means of production and large social safety net. Populism = working to level the (capitalist!) playing field for everybody; i.e., a government that doesn’t favor the wealthy and well-connected but instead treats everybody the same. They aren’t remotely the same thing.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Well congratulations you seemed to find a way to rebut my argument, even though it obviously ruined your evening.

OK, forgive my ignorance…who is “leveling” the playing field for everyone?

How could anyone with a conscience or consciousness vote for Casey, a total nonentity?

onlineanalyst on April 24, 2012 at 11:33 PM

Casey’s a big deal in PA because his dad was the governor and he’s definitely got the name recognition. That’s where the similarity ends, however, because his dad was a Dem in the JFK mold, pretty much. Plus, he was pro-life and that got him ostracized and humiliated at the 1992 Democratic Convention [The Truth About Gov. Bob Casey and The 1992 DNC Convention ].

Bob Casey Jr., for all intents and purposes, is the kind of liberal Democrat his father would have been horrified at being. I happen to agree with you that anyone with a conscience, particularly Catholics, shouldn’t be voting for him, obviously not only for the other issues he shares with Obama, but because he’s ridiculously pro-choice while being Catholic. It just puts him in that infamous club with Pelosi and Biden and all the other Catholic-in-name-only politicians that I have complete contempt for.

lol. that could be. and I agree there is no law. choas rules in this country and the world, might makes right and if you have enough money or connections you can write your own ticket. this isn’t an Obama thing. It has been going on for decades now and we are at the bitter end now I think. the experiment in freedom has never been so close to being snuffed out since 1776

unseen on April 24, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Sadly you’re right. We’re very close to losing our republic and we WILL if Obama is reelected!

Romney is bad but at least we still have a chance to save things with him. He doesn’t hate our country. He doesnt want to permanently transform it to a socialist ruin.

Good conservatives like you sitting this one out is only going to make us lose our republic. It’s that simple.

No one, at the moment. Mitt has zero interest in the little guy, he doesnt donate to campaigns. A flat tax would be a start. Getting rid of payroll taxes and corporate income tax would be another. Reining in executive-branch overregulation would be a third.

The Senate is allowing him to do that. A GOP-controlled congress will keep Obumbles occupied with corruption investigations. I look forward to watching all the roaches scurry for the shadows. A Mitt admin will just sweep all that under the rug, and I think the nation needs to see it.

alwaysfiredup on April 24, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Wouldn’t McConnell become the leader of the Senate since he’s the minority leader now?

In that case do you really think that RINO McConnell is going to stand up to Obama?